countries can provide several million hydro-electrical horse-power each; but Great Britain can furnish only a few hundred thousand, largely in out-of-the-way localities, such as the Scottish Highlands. Then again, there is the possibility that science may succeed in harnessing the tides, or that it may develop some alternative source of power. That is a fascinating question, which is being closely studied.

Although England lacks cheap water-power-and elaborate schemes for creating artificial waterfalls have the disadvantage that they are costly-there is no reason to despair of England's electrical future. Theoretically, great waterfalls provide the cheapest source of power. Moreover, waterfalls endure, while coal once burned is gone. There are, however, indications that coal will prove a cheaper source of electricity than falling water, and there is every prospect that further economies will be effected in the use of fuel; also, that the efficiency of the steam engine will be increased. It would be strange if the almost continuous progress which has taken place in this direction should now come to an abrupt end.

The bulk of America's electricity is produced by coal, although that country can theoretically develop millions of hydro-electrical horse-power from waterfalls. In Belgium, where the use of electricity has increased by leaps and bounds, there are no hydraulic supplies of power. Yet she puts England far behind her in the matter of electricity. There is obviously no reason to take a pessimistic view of England's electrical future, merely because she has no Niagara and no Zambesi. As already mentioned, Germany uses a soft brown coal, which looks like garden earth, for furnishing electrical power. The time may come when peat, of which we have superabundance, may be similarly employed with us.

England, in spite of the apparent disadvantages, has in fact great advantages for electrification. The distribution of her many coalfields and the shortness of distances, render her, in certain respects, an ideal country for the development of electrical power. Moreover, although she has lagged behind in electrical development, she has produced a number of geniuses who have brought her vigorously forward through] their practical

inventions. Not only modern machinery, but modern electrical power had their origins in this country. The fact that Englishmen have devised electrical stations of the highest efficiency may be seen, inter alia, in Northumberland, on the Clyde, and in Lancashire.

When the war had drawn to its end, the question of economic reorganisation was closely studied by competent bodies, among them the Coal Conservation Committee. In consequence of its recommendations, the Electricity Supply Bill of 1919 was drawn up, which was to give legislative sanction to its findings. If a national policy of power development had then been established, the present industrial position of this country might have been very different. Unfortunately, seven years have been wasted in discussions, proposals, and delays; but at last the Government has established a scheme of national electrification, which will entail an expenditure of perhaps 33,500,000l., but will result, it is believed, in the saving of some 44,000,000l. per year. Estimates such as these must necessarily be speculative. Yet the amount to be spent is comparatively so unimportant that the question of cost is scarcely worth considering. After all, practically the same sum was paid to the coal industry in a futile attempt to keep that industry going. A nation which has lost 500,000,000l. in consequence of the coal strike should not question the expenditure of a few millions where its industrial future is vitally concerned. The time for electrifying Great Britain is overdue. Electricity is not a luxury of the rich, but a definite industrial necessity; and, with every year that passes by, the need for electrification becomes more urgent.

By the Electricity Act we are to be given a central authority with regional administrative boards. Arrangements are to be made for providing central power stations with main transmission lines, and the interconnexion of existing stations is to be effected and power zones are to be formed, which would enter into a central power scheme. The object of unifying the electricity supply of the country would necessarily embody the creation of uniform frequency, and the territorial monopoly now held by various organisations would necessarily disappear.

Parochialism in matters electrical must go. In the

early railway age, lines were built haphazard from anywhere to anywhere. The type of rail, the gauge-in fact, everything-was left to individuals who worked in accordance with their own personal ideas in a circumscribed area. At that time, no one could imagine that railways would cover the entire country and open up continents. The development of railway traffic rendered unification and uniformity of gauge indispensable. This country suffered grievous economic loss through giving inadequate attention in early days to this development on broad national lines. If conservatism and a narrow care for established interests should hinder or prevent the future wide electrification of Great Britain, generations are sure to suffer from our short-sightedness.

Widespread unemployment and stagnation of trade and industry are largely, if not principally, due to the inefficiency of our economic outfit. We led other nations in the past by reason of our general efficiency. If we allow competitors to develop this highly valuable source of power without stirring ourselves to do likewise, we shall deserve the ill consequences which are bound to follow short-sightedness.

A not uncommon form of criticism, or obstruction, with commercially interested parties is to shriek 'Socialism' as an objection. It is, in these days, a simple way of prejudicing others, and is especially had recourse to where the private enterprise 'case' is a bad one for reasons that have already made themselves clear. Moreover, shrieking Socialism' stands a good chance of appealing to those (in or out of politics) who never trouble themselves to go into the intrinsic merits of any proposals. To those, however, who are only concerned with the National and Public aspect, the question really is whether any such proposed change could be suitably left to private enterprise; that, again, depends on whether private enterprise clashes with National and Public interests. It unfortunately clearly does so in this instance, or the changes referred to would undoubtedly have been brought about long ago. It may be added that if this Bill is Socialism,' still more so are our Navy and our Army. But it is not.

CHARLES BRIGHT.

Art. 7.-WHAT GERMANY IS DOING.

GERMANY has been defeated in war, but it is difficult to imagine that the German nation will consider that defeat as final. History has taught that a vanquished nation strives with all its might to regain, and more than regain, what it has lost unless it has experienced so overwhelming a disaster that a war of revenge seems hopeless. There was a time when Swedish and Dutch statesmen and patriots told their people that the most important task before them was to forget that they had once been a Great Power. Utterly defeated, Sweden and Holland fell never to rise again, because limitations of territory and of population proved insurmountable. There are no such impediments in the way of Germany. The character of nations is formed by their history, experiences, and tradition. Modern Germany, like the Roman Empire, sprang from the smallest beginnings. The old German Empire was modelled on the Roman Empire. That fact is familiar to all who have read Bryce's magnificent volume, The Holy Roman Empire.' The Roman Empire of German Nationality' came to an inglorious end in the time of Napoleon I. It was a political monstrosity, and its place was taken by a Prussianised Germany, by a conquering State which possessed to a high degree the characteristics of the Roman Soldier State. Treitschke, Delbrück, and many other German historians have drawn parallels between all-conquering Rome and modern Germany.

The rise of modern Germany was miraculous. The Hohenzollerns orginally were insignificant noblemen in South Germany. By successful warfare, unscrupulous diplomacy, excellent organisation, and strict military discipline they created a nation of fighters, workers, and thinkers. Every German school-child is told the stirring story of how little Brandenburg, which at the time was as insignificant as one of the smaller Balkan States, became a wealthy and powerful country. Every German citizen is acquainted with the achievements of the Great Elector, Frederick William I, Frederick the Great, William I, Stein, and Bismarck. Every German is taught that he belongs to the foremost race in the world, and

that the achievements of other nations are either insignificant in comparison or are due to the Teutonic racial leaven in them. Modern Germany, like ancient Rome, has experienced disastrous defeats which have only increased the determination of the rulers and the ruled eventually to succeed. The State of the Hohenzollerns experienced such defeats before 1806. Often nations are born in war to die in peace. Modern Germany, again like ancient Rome, has never known The Hohenzollern State has been for centuries an armed camp, a nation preparing for the coming war.

true peace.

In the past, nations were made or destroyed on the field of battle. In the modern world nations rise and fall on the field of industry. During the decades preceding the Great War, Germany advanced so rapidly in industry, commerce, wealth, and population that she might have obtained predominance in Europe, and possibly in the world, had she kept the peace. Germany almost succeeded in defeating the Allies because of the high development of her industries. She produced, during the first war-years, far more iron and steel than all the other nations of Europe combined, and she had a similar predominance in the output of chemicals. Had it not been for the assistance given to the Allies by American industries, Germany might have won the war. The strength of nations is based on their natural resources and their population. The increase of the population is determined by the natural wealth of the country and the prosperity of its industries and commerce. Stagnant industries produce stagnation in the population. Rapidly expanding industries lead to a similar expansion in population and national wealth and strength.

The great industrial leaders of Germany were convinced of the folly of the war. They knew that in peace Germany might have risen to undreamt-of heights owing to the expansion of the national industries and of the population. When defeat came they preached that Germany might regain by peaceful industry what she had lost in battle. The Court and the Junkers had refused to listen to German business men before 1914 when they spoke of world-conquest by peaceful industry.